A92138:411
The divine right of church-government and excommunication
The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peaceable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justified, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examined; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority.The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peacable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justifi'd, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examin'd; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority.
London: printed by John Field for Christopher Meredith, 1646
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Let me add these reasons to prove they cannot Adore the Image, but as a memorative sign: 1. The Image and the elements in any consideration, either as creatures, or as the honourable act of representation is put upon them, are but creatures; for the act of representation is a temporary Godhead, and maketh them but Time-Gods; Ergo, they cannot be Adored. 2. If there be two Adorations here, one given to God, and another to the Image, and if both be divine honour, there must be two collateral Gods; if Adoration prove Christ to be God, two divine honours put upon things, one upon God, and another upon the Creature; there must be ⟨p. 161⟩two Gods, or then the Creature remaining a Creature, must have Communion with Gods high honour, which is Idolatry. 3. Images and elements are either worshipped for themselves▪ or for some other thing; if for themselves, they are God, for only God for himself is worshipped with Divine honour; if for God they be worshipped, then it is an inferior, and improper worship, and therefore they must be worshipped as memorative objects. 4. Images and elements, if they partake of external worship proper to God: Why may not Sacrifices and Incense be offered unto them, and faith and hope fixed on Images? They do not partake of internal worship: for as Vasquez saith well, inward worship consisteth in Apprehension primi principii, & in motu ad illud; in apprehension of the first Author and Creator of all things, and in the wills motion toward it. But this apprehension cannot be put upon Images or elements, therefore they be here significant objects only.
Let me adde these reasons to prove they cannot Adore the Image, but as a memorative sign: 1. The Image and the elements in any consideration, either as creatures, or as the honourable act of representation is put upon them, are but creatures; for the act of representation is a temporary Godhead, and maketh them but Time-Gods; Ergo, they cannot be Adored. 2. If there be two Adorations here, one given to God, and another to the Image, and if both be divine honour, there must be two collaterall Gods; if Adoration prove Christ to be God, two divine honours put upon things, one upon God, and another upon the Creature; there must be ⟨p. 161⟩two Gods, or then the Creature remaining a Creature, must have Communion with Gods high honour, which is Idolatry. 3. Images and elements are either worshipped for themselves or for some other thing; if for themselves, they are God, for only God for himself is worshipped with Divine honour; if for God they be worshipped, then it is an inferiotr, and improper worship, and therefore they must be worshipped as memorative objects. 4. Images and elements, if they partake of externall worship proper to God: Why may not Sacrifices and Incense be offered unto them, and faith and hope fixed on Images? They do not partake of internall worship: for as Vasquez saith well, inward worship consisteth in Apprehensione primi principii, & in motu ad illud; in apprehension of the first Author and Creator of all things, and in the wills motion toward it. But this apprehension cannot be put upon Images or elements, therefore they be here significant objects only.